Proposal on Greene County law enforcement sales tax meets resistance

May 25, 2013

Written by

In the face of multi-million dollar shortfalls in the Greene County budget over the next four years, officials have begun looking elsewhere for solutions.

Target No. 1 — the first Law Enforcement Sales Tax.

At least two officeholders have called for a change to the tax that would better fund the jail, but also drastically change the City of Springfield’s finances.

On Thursday of last week, Circuit Clerk Steve Helms proposed keeping the entire 1/4-cent tax in the county and not giving any of the money to municipalities.

Presiding Commissioner Jim Viebrock has now taken that idea a step further, also advocating the county keep all of the tax, but suggesting a way he thinks the city can recoup public safety dollars.

What do other officials think?

The mayor of Springfield isn’t interested.

The city manager predicts the rest of City Council won’t go for it.

And one fellow commissioner fears it would violate the voters’ trust.

Viebrock, however, remains unfazed and insistent. He promises some sort of change to rescue county finances.

Changing the first tax

Passed in 1997, the sales tax was designed to fund public safety needs in both the county and the municipalities within it.

But the agreements over how the 1/4-cent tax would be divvied up were flawed, those involved admit. The tax, called LEST I, has failed to fully fund the promises made to voters.

In the county, that has meant a drastic shortfall in funding for the jail. While it costs upwards of $10 million to operate the jail every year, the county’s portion of LEST I is only about $4.1 million.

About 58 percent of LEST I goes to the city of Springfield to support law enforcement there. City staff expect revenues to hit $6.2 million in the upcoming fiscal year as a result of the tax.

A second 1/8-cent was passed by county voters in April and is not the focus of this discussion or Viebrock’s plan.

That plan would keep the LEST I money in the county, bringing the total amount the county could use for the jail or other law enforcement needs to about $11 million per year.

(Page 2 of 4)

“We would be well on our way to digging ourselves out of the mess we’re in,” he said.

To offset that loss, Viebrock thinks the city could take advantage of the upcoming police-fire pension tax vote.

In April, Springfield voters will decide whether to continue the ¾-cent tax for another five years.

Viebrock’s suggestion is to keep the tax going but use part of it to fund law enforcement operations.

He said specifics would have to be worked out — including the possible need for a legislative fix to allow the city to follow his plan. He also acknowledged that he hadn’t yet spoken to anyone at the city regarding the idea.

He said he hopes to sit down with the mayor soon to explain his thinking, though he emphasized his plan is only one possible solution.

“I think it’s just an idea at this point,” he said.

New idea could mean broken promises

Reached Friday after an interview with Viebrock, Mayor Bob Stephens was surprised — for the second time in two days—with another LEST idea. He said the city hadn’t heard either idea before being called by a reporter.

“Well, I’ve got two things to say, and the first is: I’m not sure why the county feels the need to try to negotiate this through the News-Leader. And the second thing is that four years ago, when the pension tax first came up, the council made several promises on that tax,” he said.

Those promises included only using the tax to fix the pension fund, not proposing a new city tax during the duration of the tax and ending the tax as soon as the pension fund reaches 100 percent of the needed money.

“I certainly plan to abide by that promise,” Stephens said.

And he’s likely not alone.

“I would be extremely surprised if the council would go back on that commitment,” City Manager Greg Burris said.

The pension fund is currently at about 60 percent.

A subcommittee of the city’s pension board has recommended continuing the tax for another five years, or shorter if it reaches the 100 percent mark. The tax is expected to draw $29.3 million over the next fiscal year.

(Page 3 of 4)

The irony, which Viebrock acknowledges, is that the pension tax had its birth due to a law he supported and helped to pass as a state-level lawmaker. It required the city of Springfield to maintain a higher balance in its pension fund for police and fire employees.

But, he pointed out, that law only requires 70 percent funding.

That, he said, could give the city some wiggle room to use some of the money generated by a mutation of the existing pension tax for funding for its police force.

But, he also acknowledges the legislature would likely have to be involved. The law that he passed likely does not allow the money to be used that way, he said.

Speaking of his time as a lawmaker, Viebrock offered a succinct summary of the irony: “I’m pretty sure I’ve shut down a way for them to do what I’m asking them to do.”

Defending his idea, however, he said it would provide for public safety issues at both the city and county level and taxpayers wouldn’t have to shell out any more money, because the tax rate would stay the same.

“It’s a difficult conversation, because we are asking the city to rearrange some of its finances,” Viebrock said, but added that the needs of the jail will keep him on the subject.

“I, personally — as the presiding commissioner — I’m not going to let this drop,” he said.

But he can’t do it alone — and drumming up support from either the city or fellow commissioners seems, at best, a long shot.

“All of a sudden, they’re looking at a source of revenue that belongs to somebody else,” Stephens said.

He repeatedly expressed his frustration that he had not heard about either plan until a reporter called him for reaction.

“I’m not sure the News-Leader is the place where this should be negotiated. If Mr. Viebrock wants to talk to me, he has my phone number.”

County reacts to new tax ideas

Even those in the county will need some convincing.

“Well, I don’t think it’s legal,” said Commissioner Roseann Bentley, who too learned of Viebrock’s plan when told by a reporter on Friday.

(Page 4 of 4)

She worried that moving taxes around in that way would send the wrong message to voters. Instead, she advocated continuing the county’s current work on long-term planning with department heads.

“We’re engaged in a very extensive look at a possibility to pull ourselves out of this conundrum. I think we really need time to consider that,” she said.

“I hope that we can complete this planning process, and do this in a way that’s thoughtful and thorough.”

She stressed that the issues confronting the county are difficult, especially when it comes to future funding. And while acknowledging that the jail is by far one of the biggest revenue issues facing officials, she warns against moving too quickly and inadvertently causing a different problem.

She said: “I think we’re getting some people who want it resolved tomorrow, and that’s just not possible.”

Prosecutor Dan Patterson similarly advocated the need for a methodical approach, with all sides at the table.

“I’ve always thought we should look at the LEST agreements, I do think they were written poorly,” Patterson said.

“I think, at some point, they (the city of Springfield) have to see we do have an issue. I don’t know what the solution is.”

County Counselor John Housley agreed that the current disbursement of the tax harms the county.

“In hindsight, we’re coming up on the short end of the stick, I’ll agree with that,” he said.

But he also warned that changes could be a legal minefield.

Sheriff Jim Arnott said he’s not taking a position on any kind of funding proposal. He feels that decision is up to the commission when it comes to funding, and jail and sheriff department operations are more his focus.

“I think the commission needs to properly fund the jail,” he said, but acknowledged that the idea of taking the first LEST back from the municipalities would harm them.

“That money would cover that area (of the jail), but then someone else would have to suffer,” he said.